Agricultural enterprises can be classified into natural, artificial, and social systems. Farms can also be classified as explicit or implicit, static or dynamic, and open or closed systems. Natural systems exist on their own without human intervention, while artificial systems require human intervention. Social systems involve the interdependence of two or more actors. Explicit farming involves precise measurements, while implicit farming relies on practical learning. Dynamic systems adapt to changes in the environment, while static systems tend to stay the same. Open systems interact with the local environment, while closed systems do not.
There are many different systems and strategies for managing agricultural enterprises, but in general they can be grouped into the three broad categories of natural, artificial and social. In practice many, if not most, agricultural activities overlap in two or even all three, depending on the nature of their business and day-to-day activities. Furthermore, farms and agricultural enterprises are sometimes classified according to their basic methodologies as well. This is typically discussed in terms of implicit or explicit agriculture, which usually depends on how precise the farmers and growers are when it comes to measuring and portioning; similarly, farms can be considered static or dynamic based on how farmers are viewed primarily in relation to the land. These aren’t necessarily systems, at least not in the strict sense of the term, but they are nonetheless influential when it comes to understanding how agribusinesses are organized and more widely understood.
Understanding of systems in general
In the agricultural industry, there are many strategies for managing farms of all sizes. The various strategies for managing an agricultural holding can generally be classified into agricultural systems. These farm management strategies typically describe whether farmers use pesticides or are organic, whether they are autonomous or interact with their surroundings, and whether farmers use rigorous measurements and plans or follow their intuition to make decisions on their farms.
natural systems
Natural agricultural systems are often among the easiest to understand, but among the rarest to see in practice. In essence, a natural system exists on its own and does not depend on human intervention or modifications to thrive. A simplified example of a natural system is a rainforest quadrant where plants grow, flower, and bear fruit; where the animals eat that fruit, fertilize the soil and allow the processes to continue.
Humans have long been interested in exploiting these natural ecosystems both for financial gain and for academic or research purposes. Farmers who duplicate nature’s methods often claim to be using “natural systems” and to some extent they are usually right; Pest control systems that use ladybugs to control aphids or exploit the acidity of certain soils to maximize growth are certainly more natural than alternatives to pesticides or fertilizers. At the same time, however, if the peasants themselves introduced these elements, the setting would necessarily be artificial, at least from a purist point of view.
Artificial systems
The largest category is usually that of artificial systems. By definition these types of systems do not exist in nature, at least not all by themselves. Human intervention is what makes them who they are. Sometimes the intervention is very large, as is often the case with genetically modified crops and animals fed highly processed animal feed, but more subtle shifts in efficiency and profitability can make even the most nature-driven enterprise technically artificial. The term is usually not intended as a judgment or value statement, but rather reflects the fundamental nature of the system in question.
social systems
In the agricultural world, a social system is one that is based at least in part on the interdependence of two or more actors. A very simple example would be two neighboring farmers exchanging essentials, such as animal feed in exchange for seeds. More often, however, the settlement has to do with property and land rights and pertains to the physical setting of the farm or business.
Explicit agriculture versus implicit agriculture
Agricultural systems can also be described as explicit or implicit, usually in relation to how they are approached from an operational perspective. When a farm uses an explicit system, the farmer weighs or measures exact amounts of nutrients such as fertilizer, water or pesticides. This type of agricultural system is most common in high-yield, for-profit agriculture. Implicit systems are often made more by instinct or practical learning that has been passed down but never formally commemorated.
While explicit farming involves careful measurement of agricultural elements and strict adherence to planned methods, most farmers also use an element of implicit farming as they observe their crops and adapt to unforeseen changes. In implicit systems, farmers use less stringent measurements. Farmers using systems based on implicit agricultural theory often use some explicit elements, such as agricultural books and almanacs, to better meet their agricultural goals.
Static and dynamic practices
Another way to classify agribusiness is based on how it is environmentally structured. Common terms in this context include dynamic and static systems, and open or closed systems. In general, a dynamic system is one that is constantly changing to account for changes in the environment, while a static system tends to stay the same. An open system will contain or interact with parts of the local environment, while a closed system will not interact with the local environment at all. For example, a greenhouse lettuce farm is a relatively enclosed environment compared to an outdoor lettuce farm.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
